Frank v. Manpower Temporary Services’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 2025
4 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on In re Thomas H. · White v. Monmouth Canning Company · Thibeault's Case · Fowler v. First National Stores, Inc. · May v. James H. Drew Shows, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“C. Notwithstanding paragraphs A and B, the average weekly wage of a seasonal worker is determined by dividing the employee’s total wages, earnings or salary for the prior calendar year by 52. (1) For the purpose of this paragraph, the term ‘seasonal worker’ does not include any employee who is customarily employed, full time or part time, for more than 26 weeks in a calendar year. The employee need not be employed by the same employer during this period to fall within this exclusion. (2) Notwithstanding subparagraph (1), the term ‘seasonal worker' includes, but is not limited to, any employee who is employed directly in agriculture or in the harvesting or initial hauling of forest products.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“B. When the employment or occupation did not continue pursuant to paragraph A for 200 full working days, “average weekly wages, earnings or salary” is determined by dividing the entire amount of wages or salary earned by the injured employee during the immediately preceding year by the total number of weeks, any part of which the employee worked during the same period. The week in which employment began, if it began during the year immediately preceding the injury, and the week in which the injury occurred, together with the amounts earned in those weeks, may not be considered in computations under this paragraph if their inclusion would reduce the average weekly wages, earnings or salary.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“D. When the methods set out in paragraph A, B or C of arriving at the average weekly wages, earnings or salary of the injured employee can not reasonably and fairly be applied, “average weekly wages” means the sum, having regard to the previous wages, earnings or salary of the injured employee and of other employees of the same or most similar class working in the same or most similar employment in the same or a neighboring locality, that reasonably represents the weekly earning capacity of the injured employee in the employment in which the employee at the time of the injury was working.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.